In the eighteenth-century, which of the following was not the reason for the defaults on payments by the zamindars?
Answer & explanation
Correct answer: option 2
The correct answer is Option (2) → The zamindars were allowed to organise troops and “cutcheries”, for increasing their authority in the rural areas.
In the early decades after the Permanent Settlement, zamindars regularly failed to pay the revenue demand. The reasons were various.
Option (1) The initial demands were very high. — Correct. The demand was set high because, once fixed for all time, the Company could never claim a share of later increases in income from land.
Option (2) The zamindars were allowed to organise troops and “cutcheries”, for increasing their authority in the rural areas. — Incorrect. The opposite happened: the Company wanted to subdue the zamindars’ authority, so their troops were disbanded and their cutcheries (courts) were brought under the supervision of a Collector. This limited power was one of the reasons for the defaults.
Option (3) High demand was imposed at a time when the prices of agricultural produce were depressed. — Correct. In the 1790s prices were low, so the ryots found it hard to pay their dues to the zamindar, and he could not pay the Company.
Option (4) The revenue was invariable, regardless of the harvest, and had to be paid punctually. — Correct. Under the Sunset Law, a zamindari whose payment did not come in by sunset of the due date was liable to be auctioned.
NCERT (2026-27): “1.3 Why zamindars defaulted on payments … Company officials felt that a fixed revenue demand would give zamindars a sense of security and, assured of returns on their investment, encourage them to improve their estates. In the early decades after the Permanent Settlement, however, zamindars regularly failed to pay the revenue demand and unpaid balances accumulated. The reasons for this failure were various. First: the initial demands were very high. This was because it was felt that if the demand was fixed for all time to come, the Company would never be able to claim a share of increased income from land when prices rose and cultivation expanded.… 1.3 Why zamindars defaulted on payments … Second: this high demand was imposed in the 1790s, a time when the prices of agricultural produce were depressed, making it difficult for the ryots to pay their dues to the zamindar. If the zamindar could not collect the rent, how could he pay the Company? Third: the revenue was invariable, regardless of the harvest, and had to be paid punctually. In fact, according to the Sunset Law, if payment did not come in by sunset of the specified date, the zamindari was liable to be auctioned. Fourth: the Permanent Settlement initially limited the power of the zamindar to collect rent from the ryot and manage his zamindari. The Company had recognised the zamindars as important, but it wanted to control and regulate them, subdue their authority and restrict their autonomy. The zamindars’ troops were disbanded, customs duties abolished, and their ‘cutcheries’ (courts) brought under the supervision of a Collector appointed by the Company. Zamindars lost their power to organise local justice and the local police.…” |